Actually I've noticed that was no longer the case. In fact this image has been used to start two genuine articles about a murder case--Judge Howarth15:42, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Both one line articles have been speedily deleted twice. This inappropriate image was given inappropriate prominance in those articles, suggesting that POV was involved. This image is currently OR. The JPS16:12, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - part of the problem is that you have a vandal arguing for it to be kept. The facts are that the image is a genuine copy of a headline on that day from the Cambridge Evening News and is thus usable under fair use - and the only reason that image occassionally disappears from the two articles, which JPS keeps trying to sneakily dispose of, is an odd 'misguided' (to put it charitably) campaign by JPS. 83.146.55.8512:56, 17 April 2006 (UTC) More info: Fred Moss. And for god's sake, this image is NOT ORIGINAL RESEARCH.[reply]
Comment - see the top of this page, OR means "orphaned" not "original research." I have no problem with the text of the quote going into the article; I just think that putting it into the image like a t-shirt or a bumpersticker is in poor taste. Also, your claims for fair use don't fit the way we handle fair use on Wikipedia - see Wikipedia:Fair use. FWIW, I found out about the image because of the posting on WP:AN about Hamish Ross - not because of any campaign by The JPS. FreplySpang(talk)14:23, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Reply to Comment The image is one that was used at the time on the CEN website, and is in their house style, thus it gives an excellent example of the press coverage. I also don't consider this to be in poor taste - have you seen the diahroea (sp!) page? 83.146.55.8514:33, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]